Discussion in 'Politics' started by ColonelAngus, Oct 23, 2017.
Why or why not?
No one is proposing to cap them at $2400 per year. The discussion was to cap the amount of tax free contributions at $2400 per year.
I would argue no caps of any kind. Lends itself to people being responsible and saving for their own retirement instead of expecting Uncle Sam to.
We know what it meant.
Follow the GOP plan and at 18 thousand you would pay taxes of 6 thousand.
The way it works now is that you pay the taxes when you withdraw it. That's how it works on mine. It gives you incentive to not take it out. But keep saving.
Well of course. That's the entire point.
Do you support lowering the TAX FREE contribution from $18,000 per year to $2400?
Yea, let the fukers get old and starve It's what they get for having families.
In fact, why even have an army. What are we protecting. Just fuk everything. Every man for himself.
401ks are a crock of dogshit. It's another human controlling your money, like social security is.
Suuuure you can borrow some of..your own money. For a penalty.........
We should encourage individual retirement planning so the government doesn't have to provide for everyone who is retired.
We already support enough working age people who are fully capable of working.
We should give the money to the government to safeguard for our retirement?????????????????????????????????????????????? Fuck no!
Were I to have my way, there'd be no cap at all, so I must answer your question no.
Why do I think there should be no cap?
Because I see no good reason to place limits on the means, modes and sums one opts to save to finance one's retirement. Yes, there are other ways of saving for retirement, but most of them that offer returns comparable to those one can obtain via 401K plans also require either a good deal of effort on one's own part or that one engage a financial advisor.
Few people have the time, to say nothing of the technical know-how to, for themselves, do the requisite research and maintain an keen understanding of and ongoing awareness about host of things, not the least of which include specific investment opportunities, tactics, trends, indicators, etc. One's need to know and aptly apply that type of knowledge is dramatically reduced by one's ability to avail oneself of financial investing experts' doing that on behalf of millions of people at one time. For the average person, that's a good thing.
Because the cap, for many people, serves as an implied indicator of the maximum they actually need to invest to fund their dotage. It doesn't really matter whether that be so, what matters is that people do in fact make that inference without confirming whether it is so. What also matters is that for some people, the maximum they can invest in a 401K will not support their retirement lifestyle and the cap necessarily forces them -- at the cost of a lot of their time and/or money -- to pursue additional avenues for doing so. Why should they have to do that when simply putting more into their 401K would do the trick?
Separate names with a comma.